Journal of Soil and Groundwater Environment (한국지하수토양환경학회지:지하수토양환경)

Korean Society of Soil and Groundwater Environment (한국지하수토양환경학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Priority Assessment for Groundwater Contamination Management Using Analytic Hierarchy Process (AHP) and GIS Approach

계층분석법(AHP)과 GIS를 이용한 고양시 일대의 지하수오염 관리우선순위 평가

  • 이명진 (한국환경정책.평가연구원) ;
  • 현윤정 (한국환경정책.평가연구원) ;
  • 김영주 (한국환경정책.평가연구원) ;
  • 황상일 (한국환경정책.평가연구원)
  • Received : 2013.06.10
  • Accepted : 2013.09.16
  • Published : 2013.10.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

In this study, priority for groundwater contamination management was assessed based on regional vulnerability in Goyang-si area, Gyonggi-do, Korea using analytic hierarchy process (AHP) and geographic information system (GIS). We proposed a concept for regional vulnerability to groundwater contamination with using socio-environmental vulnerability factors, which can be classified into three properties including regional hydrogeological property, contamination property, and groundwater use property. This concept is applied to Goyang-si area. For AHP analysis, an expertise-targeted survey was conducted. Based on the survey, a total of 10 factors (criteria) and corresponding weights for regional vulnerability assessment were determined. The result shows that regional contamination property is the most weighted factor among the three property groups (hydrogeological property: contamination property: groundwater use property = 0.3: 0.4: 0.3). Then, database layers for those factors were constructed, and regional vulnerability to groundwater contamination was assessed by weighted superposition using GIS. Results show that estimated regional vulnerability score is ranged from 22.7 to 94.5. Central and western areas of Goyang-si which have groundwater tables at shallow depths and are mainly occupied by industrial and residential areas are estimated to be relatively highly vulnerable to groundwater contamination. Based on assessed regional vulnerability, we classified areas into 4 categories. Category 1 areas, which are ranked at the top 25% of vulnerability score, take about 2.8% area in Goyang-si and give a high priority for groundwater contamination management. The results can provide useful information when the groundwater management authority decide which areas should be inspected with a high priority for efficient contamination management.

Keywords

References

  1. Gogu, R.C. and Dassargues, A., 2000, Current trends and future challenges in groundwater vulnerability assessment using overlay and index methods, Environ. Geol., 39(6), 549-559. https://doi.org/10.1007/s002540050466
  2. Ham, S.Y., Cheong, J.Y., Kim, M.J., Kim, I.S., and Hwang, H.S., 2004, Assessing groundwater vulnerability using DRASTIC method and groundwater quality in Changwon City, Econ. Environ. Geol., 37(6), 631-645.
  3. Jo, S.B., Min, K.D., Woo, N.C., and Lee, S.R., 1999, A study on groundwater contamination potential of Pyungtaek-Gun area, Kyunggi-Do using GIS, J. Soil & Groundwater Environ., 6(2), 87-94.
  4. Kang, J. and Park, E., 2010, A comparative application of DRASTIC and SINTACS models for the assessment of groundwater vulnerability of Buyeo area, J. Soil & Groundwater Environ., 15(5), 32-39.
  5. Kim, G.B., 2008, Consideration of trends and applications of groundwater vulnerability assessment methods in South Korea, J. Soil & Groundwater Environ., 13(6), 1-16.
  6. Kim, G.B., Ahn, J.S., and Marui, Atsunao, 2009, Analytic hierarchy models for regional groundwater monitoring well allocation in Southeast Asian countries and South Korea, Environ. Earth Sci., 59, 325-338. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12665-009-0029-1
  7. Lee, H., Park, E., Kim, K., and Park, K.H., 2008, A joint application of DRASTIC and numerical groundwater flow model for the assessment of groundwater vulnerability of Buyeo-Eup area, J. Soil & Groundwater Environ., 13(1), 77-91.
  8. Lee, M., Lee, J., Jeon, S., and Houng, H., 2010, Review of policy direction & coupled model development between groundwater recharge quantity and climate change, J. Environ. Policy, 9, 157-184. https://doi.org/10.17330/joep.9.2.201006.157
  9. Lee, M. and Lee, J., 2011, Coupled model development between groundwater recharge quantity and climate change using GIS, KAGIS, 14(3), 36-51. https://doi.org/10.11108/kagis.2011.14.3.036
  10. Lee, S.R. and Kim Y.J., 1996, Analysis of groundwater pollution potential and risk using DRASTIC SYSTEM, J. GIS Ass. Korea, 4(1), 1-11.
  11. Lee, S.R. and Choi, S.H., 1997, Groundwater pollution susceptibility assessment of Younggwang area using GIS technique, J. Soil & Groundwater Environ., 4(4), 223-230.
  12. Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs (MOLTMA) and K-water, 2011, Annual report on groundwater.
  13. Saaty, T.L., 1980, The Analytic Hierarchy Process: Planning, Priority Setting, Resource Allocation (Decision Making Series), McGraw Hill Inernational, 287 p.
  14. Song, S.H. and Choi, K.J., 2012, An appropriate utilization of agricultural water resources of Jeju island with climate change (I), J. Soil & Groundwater Environ., 17(2), 62-70. https://doi.org/10.7857/JSGE.2012.17.2.062
  15. Woo, N.C., 1994, Introduction to DRASTIC: a method for groundwater vulnerability assessment, Econ. Environ. Geol., 27(6), 611-612.
  16. Woo, N.C., 2013, Climate change and groundwater sustainability in Korea for next decade, J. Soil & Groundwater Environ., 18(1), 1-5. https://doi.org/10.7857/JSGE.2013.18.1.001

Cited by

  1. Study on the Application of Spatial-analysis of Pollutants and Load Duration Curve for Efficient Implementation of TMDLs system vol.39, pp.12, 2017, https://doi.org/10.4491/KSEE.2017.39.12.655